ectool: add support for the MEC LPC protocol #5
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
DHowett
commented
Jan 24, 2022
The MEC LPC protocol is supported in Linux' cros_ec_lpcs driver, but not in ectool's "local" implementation. However, cros_ec_lpcs will not load on the Framework Laptop due to an I/O port conflict[^1]. Therefore, ectool's local implementation is required to support the MEC protocol on kernel versions that do not contain a fix for the I/O conflict. [^1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/1/4/1160
kiram9
approved these changes
Jan 5, 2023
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The MEC LPC protocol is supported in Linux'
cros_ec_lpcsdriver, but notin ectool's "local" implementation. However,
cros_ec_lpcswill not loadon the Framework Laptop due to an I/O port conflict1. Therefore,
ectool's local implementation is required to support the MEC protocol on
kernel versions that do not contain a fix for the I/O conflict.
I've not taken care to deduplicate the protocol code with comm-lpc,
as there is little value in sharing due to the different order in which
command data are checksummed.
Footnotes
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/chrome-platform/cover/20220217165930.15081-1-dustin@howett.net/ ↩